[exec] -1 overall. [exec][exec] +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.[exec][exec] -1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests.[exec] Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch.[exec] Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.[exec][exec] +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.[exec][exec] +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings.[exec][exec] +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.[exec][exec] +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings.

Jitendra Nath Pandey
added a comment - 09/Aug/10 19:50 ant test was run manually. All tests pass.
test-patch results:
[exec] -1 overall.
[exec]
[exec] +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
[exec]
[exec] -1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests.
[exec] Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch.
[exec] Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
[exec]
[exec] +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.
[exec]
[exec] +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings.
[exec]
[exec] +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.
[exec]
[exec] +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings.

Nigel Daley
added a comment - 13/Dec/10 18:14
[exec] Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch.
[exec] Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
Please provide this info in the future. Stating that is was manually tested on trunk is insufficient.